Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

[Trovador]

The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.

Don't get me wrong, the 5D MkII is an excellent camera and will be relevant for years to come, but for the same price I'd be all over the new entry level model. I'd be more than willing to trade off the weather sealing for the added hardware.

 

[briansquibb]

@astro - tell us what kit you have so we can understand where you are coming from

oh you again....

you are the typical fanboy.. and if there would be ignore button here i would use it on you.
upset again that the word "nikon" is mentioned in a canon forum?

i come from a AE-1.
im a canon user since the 1984 olympics. now what does that tell you?

Is that all you see in the 5D3?

that´s what people here beat to death as great improvement over the MK2....
and it sure is.. if you need it.

but there are enough people here who own a MK2 and have sure looked closely at the MK3 and decided it offers not enough to justify an upgrade.
that he wrote people don´t "understand" what the MK3 has to offer is a bit.. well lets say it frank.. bullshit

As an ex user of a 5D2 the AF improvement is significant - but a long way from being the only improvement.

You being a Canon user since 1984 just means you have been using Canon kit about the same length of time as me. For all I know you might still be using a 300D or a 1DX.

I dont understand why you are fixated on 5DII users upgrading to a 5DIII. If I still had my 5DII I wouldn't upgrade - however for those non 5DII users - perhaps those with 60Ds - there are a lot of good features which might mean they go to the 5DIII and skip the 5DII or an entry level FF.

I think it is right that we give these people balanced, informed information to allow them to make their own mind up.

The fact that I have to keep coming posting to correct biased or incorrect information reflects badly on this forum

 

[Astro]

The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.

if canon would be the only camera maker it sure looks like a good deal.
compared to the rumored D600... well... no.

and you have to understand the different needs.

for me the 5D MK3 sensor has no real advantage.
i shot below ISO 1600 99% of the time.

i shoot landscape, macro and home studio studio stuff.
85% of the time i use the center AF point.

i shot no video.

so why should people like me update to a 5D MK3 or this new FF camera?

from a company point of view it sure makes sense.
but we are individuals here, with individual needs.

 

[RC]

...One possible fly in the ointment is that I doubt the new body will have AFMA, which would be a pity.

No AFMA, I won't even consider, that is a sure deal breaker!

 

[briansquibb]

so why should people like me update to a 5D MK3 or this new FF camera?

from a company point of view it sure makes sense.
but we are individuals here, with individual needs.

No one is saying you should upgrade.

Everyone should be free to decide - but the information needed to decide should be available to them in an objective and unbiased form

 

[AAPhotog]

And I don't like to read the lamentations about "D600 is better than the new Canon FF" - both do not exist in our hands and we cannot compare them really. And ... I have spent a lot of money in some glass for the Canon EF mount - switching to Nikon is not a matter of saving (hypothetically) 500$/EUR, its to buy a lot of Nikkors ... oh, impossible, I cannot replace all the glass I need because Nikon has not these options ...

I agree, too much spec racing going on and we dont have confirmation yet, the D600 could end up being the same price for all we know. And the D800 feels so cheap I'd be scared to see what a $1500 D600 felt like, probably all plastic and flimsy as crap.

One of the major differences between the 5d2 and 5d3 is the autofocus. That to me is the reason why the 5d3 costs 1500 more. Although this entry level full frame wont have an AF as good as thre 5d3, it is rumored to be an upgrade from the 5d2. So why isn't it worth the same price as the 5d2 again? Basically the only difference between the 5d2 and 5d3 is the AF and thats worth $1500 in that case. but this AF UPGRADE isn't worth the same price? Im lost. and this is coming from a 5d3 owner.

 

[Trovador]

The 5D MkIII sensor, 7D like autofocus, and a pop-up flash (probably with flash control) and it's not an upgrade over the MkII for the same price?.

if canon would be the only camera maker it sure looks like a good deal.
compared to the rumored D600... well... no.

and you have to understand the different needs.

for me the 5D MK3 sensor has no real advantage.
i shot below ISO 1600 99% of the time.

i shoot landscape, macro and home studio studio stuff.
85% of the time i use the center AF point.

i shot no video.

so why should people like me update to a 5D MK3 or this new FF camera?

from a company point of view it sure makes sense.
but we are individuals here, with individual needs.

Well, it's impossible to please everyone so one must find a system that best suits their needs based on one's current's situation... For me I see plenty of them...I own a 7D and a complete kit of L lenses (which to me are reason enough to stay with Canon and not consider Nikon). Camera bodies come and go.

I have a 7D and a am looking to also buy a FF to take full advantage of my current lenses. The 5D MkIII is over my budget, leaving the 5D mKII as my only choice. The rumored features of the new entry level FF hit the spot for my needs. Better autofocus, a sensor with better low light performance, popr up flash with wireless, etc... where do I sign up?.

 

[AAPhotog]

Wonder why he deleted his post... hmmm

 

[D_Rochat]

WTF is up with everyone and this word troll??? Shut the ****** up already. Too much internet lingo. You need a life. Im a troll, why? Because I don't sit on internet forums wasting my life away? Or because I voice MY opinion

troll
1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase “trolling for newbies” which in turn comes from mainstream “trolling”, a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. See also YHBT.

2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, “Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll.”

Wonder why he deleted his post... hmmm

The mods are deleting posts and issuing warnings......

 

[briansquibb]

The mods are deleting posts and issuing warnings......

Good !!

Personal insults do nothing to add to a discussion

 

[AdamJ]

Well, it's impossible to please everyone so one must find a system that best suits their needs based on one's current's situation... For me I see plenty of them...I own a 7D and a complete kit of L lenses (which to me are reason enough to stay with Canon and not consider Nikon). Camera bodies come and go.

I have a 7D and a am looking to also buy a FF to take full advantage of my current lenses. The 5D MkIII is over my budget, leaving the 5D mKII as my only choice. The rumored features of the new entry level FF hit the spot for my needs. Better autofocus, a sensor with better low light performance, popr up flash with wireless, etc... where do I sign up?.

You're Canon's target buyer for the new body. There will be many, many more with the same reasoning.

 

[D_Rochat]

Back on track. Like others have mentioned, I think this is a solid upgrade for people using the 60D or lower and are wanting to get into a FF. Not really an upgrade for the 5DII users, but it's not meant to be.

 

[Radiating]

How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?

If you don't think there is a noticable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor then maybe you could tell me if you notice a difference between these photos:

That's a back to back comparison with the 5D3 resized to 5D2 size. The 5D3 sensor has a significantly better AA filter that is more efficient in terms of preventing lost detail for a given level of moire reduction and so produces sharper images.

Furthermore many of the people saying that the 5D3 isn't that much better in ISO are not comparing the cameras correctly in likely two ways. Camera manufactuers generally make up their cameras ISO ratings out of thin air. There are a few acceptable ways of rating ISO but most manufacturers chose fringe methods which aren't widely respected so the can make up their ISO numbers as they see fit and when the 5D2 was released the ISO ratings were very optimistic to say the least with ISO 12800 being actually around what is commonly accepted as ISO 7000. With the 5D3 Canon has been less optimistic so ISO 12800 is actually a "true" ISO of 10000. The point is that people are comparing cameras using their RATED ISO which are on different scales not ISO measured on the same scale. It's like comparing a car going 0-60 kph vs a car that's going 0-60 mph, which doesn't make sense. The other issue is that after speaking to several Canon Techs and Reps, it seems that Canon specially designed the 5D3 to produce very low noise JPG's for photographers that have to shoot in JPG. Part of the innovation that they introduced was software but they also engineered the hardware to help in the process to make the noise coming from the sensor have far less speckle noise and have a very gausian distribution. This makes computer programs able to distinguish from the noise easier so when you apply noise reduction there is a slight advantage to the 5D3 of around a quarter of a stop more than the RAW data would suggest.


In any case here's a comparison between the 5D3 and the 5D2 rendered at the same resolution with the same ACR settings applied at a true ISO of 10084 for both cameras, this is a combination of a series of exposures using a method developed in consultation with the Cambridge Signal Processing Lab. I do consulting for a few camera review websites to develop testing methods and put this together for a project, with permission from all collaborators.

In any case feel free to spot the difference between the 5D2 and 5D3.

 

[mrsfotografie]

How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?

Canon kinda did the same thing with the 1000D vs the 400D. The 400D really is the better of these two so when I wanted to buy a small SLR for those moments when I prefer not to use/carry my 7D or 5D2, I bought a second hand 400D over a new or even second hand 1000D.

 

[AAPhotog]

The mods are deleting posts and issuing warnings......

Good !!

Personal insults do nothing to add to a discussion

thanks for the clarification. Wonder why I'm a troll for my original comment rofl

 

[Random Orbits]

Back on track. Like others have mentioned, I think this is a solid upgrade for people using the 60D or lower and are wanting to get into a FF. Not really an upgrade for the 5DII users, but it's not meant to be.

Another point to mention is that the additional plastic would be to minimize cost. Even though newer cameras are surpassing the 5DII, the cost to manufacture a 5DII is not going down. 2000-2200 might be the floor where making the 5DII is profitable or not. If it comes out now with 5DIIs still in the retail channels, then it might not be an obvious win. But how about in a year or two when the 5DII is out of production, and the price for this drops to 1600-1700? That would lower the price of entry to the FF club, which is a win for a lot of people.

 

[pakosouthpark]

Another point to mention is that the additional plastic would be to minimize cost. Even though newer cameras are surpassing the 5DII, the cost to manufacture a 5DII is not going down. 2000-2200 might be the floor where making the 5DII is profitable or not. If it comes out now with 5DIIs still in the retail channels, then it might not be an obvious win. But how about in a year or two when the 5DII is out of production, and the price for this drops to 1600-1700? That would lower the price of entry to the FF club, which is a win for a lot of people.

but then d600 is better specs, probably plastic build as well but CHEAPER!

 

[RLPhoto]

This will be my next camera as long as its sub 2000$. 19 crops type AF points like the 7D is more than enough for me.

 

[briansquibb]

but then d600 is better specs, probably plastic build as well but CHEAPER!

I would wait until we see back to back tests before jumping to conclusions

 

[AdamJ]

I wonder what they'll call it.

A single-digit name is dictated by the build, not the sensor size, in which case this body would break with tradition if it were called, say, a 6D. But if not a single-digit name, then what could it be called?